CO<sub>2</sub> emissions and mitigation policies for urban road transportation: Sao Paulo <i>versus</i> Shanghai

Costa, Evaldo; Seixas, Julia; Baptista, Patrícia; Costa, Gustavo; Turrentine, Thomas

doi:10.1590/2175-3369.010.SUPL1.AO15

home Table of contents navigate_before previous current next navigate_next

Scientific Article • urbe, Rev. Bras. Gest. Urbana 10 (Supl. 1) • Nov 2018 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-3369.010.SUPL1.AO15 linkcopy

CO₂ emissions and mitigation policies for urban road transportation: Sao Paulo versus Shanghai

Emissões de CO₂ e políticas de mitigação para o transporte rodoviário urbano: São Paulo versus Xangai

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

This paper compares the energy consumption, CO₂ emissions and public policies of two mega-cities, Sao Paulo (SP) and Shanghai (SH), in order to identify their GHG emissions mitigation policies. Both cities have experienced rapid growth of the automotive sectors resulting in sizable pollution and CO₂ emission challenges. SP has successfully implemented the ethanol and encouraged the growth of the fleet of light-duty vehicles. SH has coal-based power generation and restricted the ownership of the vehicles in an attempt to reduce GHG emissions, invested in public transportation and electric mobility. Tabular analysis of secondary data was adopted in this study, revealing also that SP has considerably expanded individual transportation. Despite investments in ethanol, the city could not contain the increase in CO₂ emissions from road transportation. SH invested in public transportation and inhibited individual transportation, but also failed to contain CO₂ emissions. Mitigation policies and measures taken were not sufficient to prevent growth of CO₂ emissions in both cities. To reduce CO₂ emissions in transportation, SP and SH should focus on public policies to encourage public and clean transportation and limit the burning of fossil fuels.

Keywords:
Sao Paulo; Shanghai; Energy; CO₂ emission; Urban road transportation

Category/Year (10³)	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
Cars	3,375	3,484	3,580	3,781	4,009	4,731	4,952	5,093
Minibus, bus, truck and utility	455	470	485	518	558	600	653	705
Trucks	115	118	121	124	128	165	164	159
Bus	31	33	34	35	37	41	41	42
Moped, scooter, motorcycle	337	371	404	482	576	756	816	875
Trailer and semi-trailer	52	54	56	59	62	67	69	72
Other	14	15	16	17	18	5	6	6
TOTAL	4,379	4,545	4,696	5,016	5,388	6,365	6,701	6,952
Fleet’s growth %	-	3.8	3.3	6.8	7.4	18.1	5.3	3.5

Fuel (PJ)	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
(1) Gasoline	52.4	50.4	52.0	53.1	52.9	51.0	48.0	52.3
(2) Ethanol anhydrous	10.9	11.7	12.0	9.9	11.6	11.8	11.1	12.1
(3) Ethanol hydrated	6.2	9.3	10.4	18.6	28.8	35.8	44.3	40.9
(4) Diesel	45.5	47.8	48.6	43.2	50.0	55.8	53.9	56.9
(5) Biodiesel	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
(6) GNV	6.4	7.2	8.2	9.8	10.7	9.4	6.4	5.3
(7) Aviation gasoline	0.1	0.2	0.3	0.3	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1
(8) Aviation kerosene	12.3	12.6	11.3	12.7	12.7	9.8	9.4	10.2
Total transportation (1:8)	133.8	139.1	142.9	147.7	166.8	173.7	173.2	177.8
Total urban road transportation (1:6)	121.3	126.3	131.2	134.7	154.0	163.8	163.7	167.5

Categories (PJ)	2003			2010			SP 03 vs 10	SH 03 vs 10
Categories (PJ)	SP	SH	% SH/SP	SP	SH	% SH/SP	% Growth
Gasoline	52.4	16.1	30.7	52.3	42.4	36.3	0.0	163.3
Diesel oil	45.5	36.9	81.1	56.9	72.3	27.1	25.0	95.9
Ethanol anhydrous	10.9	0.0	-	12.1	0.0	-	11.0	0.0
Ethanol hydrated	6.2	0.0	-	40.9	0.0	-	659.6	0.0
Other	6.4	16.9	89.9	5.3	33.7	635.8	(17.2)	99.4
Total urban road transportation	121.4	69.9	55.1	167.5	148.4	88.6	38.0	112.3
Per capita consumption (MJ)	30.2	39.9	32.3	35.1	59.6	69.9	16.2	49.2

Categories (10³)		2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
Car	Small Passenger ^* * It includes small buses and vans. Data source: ( Annual Report, 2015a , 2015b ).	505	609	715	819	936	1,046	1,180	1,355
	Large coach	33	34	35	36	39	47	54	63
	Truck	185	199	204	201	209	213	216	230
	Other	30	30	34	39	45	49	52	58
	(A) Subtotal	753	872	988	1,095	1,229	1,355	1,502	1,707
Motorcycle	Motorcycle	125	111	98	81	73	67	63	58
	Moped	863	1,024	1,019	944	956	909	853	706
	(B) Subtotal	988	1,135	1,117	1,025	1,029	976	917	764
Other		8	9	10	11	12	13	14	16
Total Vehicle (A+B)		1,749	2,016	2,115	2,131	2,270	2,344	2,434	2,488
Fleet’s evolution %		-	15.3	4.9	0.8	6.6	3.3	3.8	2.2

Fuel (PJ) / Year	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
(1) Raw total	3.3	2.2	1.9	1.3	1.3	1.5	1.4	1.2
(2) Fuel oil	153.8	190.4	226.8	256.0	289.3	281.4	266.6	270.1
(3) Kerosene	43.5	71.4	80.1	112.5	127.1	141.4	152.1	170.7
(4) Gasoline	16.1	18.6	26.5	29.2	32.9	38.9	40.6	42.4
(5) Diesel oil	36.9	45.4	40.7	47.3	56.1	62.2	67.2	72.3
(6) Liquefied LNG	1.1	3.7	3.7	3.5	3.4	3.7	3.3	3.3
(7) Petrol gas (LPG)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
(8) Other petroleum	4.1	5.6	5.5	5.5	9.3	13.6	11.6	16.1
(9) Products Nat. gas	0.5	0.7	0.8	0.7	0.7	1.0	1.1	1.1
(10) Heat	0.1	0.2	0.2	0.3	0.3	0.3	0.8	0.9
(11) Electricity	11.1	13.3	13.6	16.3	18.3	21.9	9.3	12.3
Total combustion fuel	270.4	351.5	399.8	472.4	538.6	565.9	554.1	590.5
Total urban road Tran	69.9	87.4	91.1	102.6	121.0	141.6	134.0	148.4

CO₂ emission (PJ)	2003			2010			SP 2003 × 2010	SH 2003 × 2010
CO₂ emission (PJ)	SP	SH	% SH/SP	SP	SH	% SH/SP	% Growth
Gasoline	8,014	3,124	39.0	8,082	12,268	151.8	0.8	292.7
Diesel oil	3,369	2,729	81.0	4,213	5,353	127.1	25.1	96.1
Ethanol hydrous	425	0.0	-	2,821	0,0	-	563.8	0.0
Other	1,111	407	36.6	1,133	1,511	133.4	1.9	271.5
Total	12,919	6,261	48.5	16,249	19,133	117.7	25.8	205.6
Per capita emission	2.95	3.58	21.4	2.34	7.69	328.6	(20.7)	214.8

Action	SP			SH
Action	Adopt ^¹ 1 In the case, the city implemented the policy.	Date ^² 2 Date the city implemented the policy.	Imp ^³ 3 How important was the policy to mitigate CO2 in the first 2000 decade, where: > Very Large Impact; ≥ Relevant; < Low relevance; ξ No relevance.	Adopt ^¹ 1 In the case, the city implemented the policy.	Date ^² 2 Date the city implemented the policy.	Imp ^³ 3 How important was the policy to mitigate CO2 in the first 2000 decade, where: > Very Large Impact; ≥ Relevant; < Low relevance; ξ No relevance.
Removal of old cars from circulation	No	-	ξ	Yes	2011/13	ξ
Restriction of circulation (licenses rotation)	Yes	1997	>	Yes	1986/2000/2004	>
Annual survey of the urban road transportation	Yes	2008/10	<	Yes	2004	≥
Emissions inventory	Yes	2003	>	Yes	2004	≥
Reducing urban road transportation emissions as goal	Yes	2009	<	Yes	2010	ξ
Adoption of alternative fuel (ethanol)	Yes	1975	>	No	-	ξ
Implementation of emission control system (Euro)	Yes	1987/89	>	Yes	2001/3	>
Prioritized investments in public transportation	No	-	ξ	Yes	2004	≥
Subsidy for purchase of green vehicles	No ^* * SH offers free license and SP discount, both considered in this study as “Benefit to use green vehicles”.	-	ξ	No ^* * SH offers free license and SP discount, both considered in this study as “Benefit to use green vehicles”.	-	ξ
Benefit for the use of green vehicles	Yes	2014		Yes	2014	ξ
Incentive policy to exchanging old cars for new ones	No	-	ξ	Yes	2014	ξ
To ban motorcycle circulation	No	-	ξ	Yes	2002	>
Politic of old bus exchange for new hybrid and electric vehicles	No	-	ξ	Yes	2012	ξ
Emission reduction	Yes	2003/10	>	No	-	ξ
Reduce emissions of the urban road transportation	No	-	ξ	No	-	ξ

	Municipality
	SP			SH
Foundation (year)	1554			751 ^* * The city of SH is considered a municipality since 1927
Area (km²)	1,523			6,340
Indicators/Years	2000	2010	%	2000	2010	%
Population (10³)	10.4	11.2	7.8	16.7	23.0	37.5
Density (%)	6.85	7.39	7.8	2.64	3.63	37.5
Human Development Index	0.733	0.805	9.8	0.745	0.814	9.2
Gross domestic product (10⁶)	43.5	151.8	248.2	45.5	271.4	496.3
Gross domestic product per capita	4.1	13.4	222.9	2.7	11.7	333.6
Urbanization level (%)	94.0	98.9	5.2	82.8	88.3	6.6

Categories (10³)	2003			2010			SP 2003 vs 2010	SH 2003 vs 2010
Categories (10³)	SP	SH	% SH/SP	SP	SH	% SH/SP	% Growth
Small passenger	3,375	505	15.0	5,093	1,355	26.6	50.9	168.3
Motorcycles	337	125	37.1	875	58	6.6	159.6	-46.4
Large buses	31	33	106.4	42	63	150.0	35.5	90.9
Other	636	1,086	170.8	942	1,012	107.4	48.1	-6.9
Total	4,379	1,749	39.9	6,952	2,488	35.8	58.8	42.2

SP vs SH: vehicle 100,000 residents	2003			2010
Per capita rate / Vehicle type	SP	SH	SP/SH ^{^} Number of times SP is greater than SH.	SP	SH	SP/SH ^{^} Number of times SP is greater than SH.
Small passenger	32,353	0.302	107	45,259	0.589	77
Large coach	0.299	0.020	15	0.374	0.027	14
Truck	1,111	0.111	10	1,416	0.100	14
Motorcycle	3,231	0.075	43	7,783	0.025	309
Other	5,011	0.538	9	6,969	0.339	21
Total	42,005	10,448	4	61,801	10,807	6

SP						SH
Phase Euro	Phase Brazil	Year Bus	Year Truck	Phase Car	Year Car	Phase China	Diesel	Gasoline
-	P-1	1987	1989	L-1	1988-91	-	-	-
Euro 0	P-2	-	1994/6	L-2	1992-96	-	-	-
Euro I	P-3	1994	1996/0	L-3	1997-04	China I-II	2001/4	2003/4
Euro II	P-4	1998	2000/2	L-4	2005-08	China I-II	2001/4	2003/4
Euro III	P-5	2004/5	2005/6	L-5	2009-13	China III-IV	2008/13	2010/13
Euro IV	P-6	2009		L-6	2014	China III-IV	2008/13	2010/13
Euro V	P-7	2012		L-7	-	China V	2008/13	2015
Euro VI	P-8	-		L-8	-	-	-	-

vertical_align_top file_download show_chart

more_horiz close
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná Rua Imaculada Conceição, 1155. Prédio da Administração - 6°andar, 80215-901 - Curitiba - PR, 55 41 3271-1701 - Curitiba - PR - Brazil
E-mail: urbe@pucpr.br

rss_feed Stay informed of issues for this journal through your RSS reader

Accessibility / Report Error

[1] Data source: ( Detran, 2015 ).

CO2 emissions and mitigation policies for urban road transportation: Sao Paulo versus Shanghai

Emissões de CO2 e políticas de mitigação para o transporte rodoviário urbano: São Paulo versus Xangai

Abstract

CO₂ emissions and mitigation policies for urban road transportation: Sao Paulo versus Shanghai

Emissões de CO₂ e políticas de mitigação para o transporte rodoviário urbano: São Paulo versus Xangai